Fox v. Gardner, Assignee is a United States Supreme Court case from 1874. The case involved a dispute between two parties over a contract for the sale of goods. The plaintiff, Fox, had entered into a contract with the defendant, Gardner, to purchase a large quantity of goods. Gardner then assigned the contract to another party, who then refused to fulfill the contract. Fox sued Gardner for breach of contract, arguing that Gardner was liable for the breach since he had assigned the contract to another party. The Supreme Court held that Gardner was not liable for the breach of contract. The Court reasoned that Gardner had not breached the contract himself, and that the contract was between Fox and the assignee, not Gardner. The Court further held that Gardner had not assumed any responsibility for the performance of the contract, and that the assignee was solely responsible for the breach. The Court concluded that Gardner was not liable for the breach of contract.

In Fox v. Gardner, Assignee, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a debtor’s property could be sold to satisfy an unpaid debt without first obtaining a court order. The majority opinion held that such sales were permissible under state law and did not require judicial approval. Justice Field dissented from this decision, arguing that it violated the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by allowing creditors to take possession of their debtors' property without any prior notice or hearing before a court. He argued that such actions deprived individuals of their right to defend themselves against claims made by creditors and thus constituted an unconstitutional taking of private property without just compensation or due process protections in place. Furthermore, he noted that if these sales were allowed then there would be no incentive for creditors to seek out legal remedies when attempting to collect debts owed them since they could simply seize assets on their own authority instead.